(11-12-2013 10:28 AM)kingschosen Wrote: Likewise, having a "choice" isn't being true to Reformed and Calvinistic theology.

Where are your sources? The Reformed Confessions cited above disagree with you.

The word choice is misleading if not specified whether the term is being used in the objective or subjective view. However it is perfectly plausible that all that happens is God's plan to get rid of vanity, which would make both of you right in some degree.

I read through the confessionals, and to me, they seem contradictory, thus I have to reject them.

This right here in inexcusable and is a slap in the face to basic logic:

We believe that this good God, after creating all things, did not abandon them to chance or fortune but leads and governs them according to his holy will, in such a way that nothing happens in this world without God’s orderly arrangement. Yet God is not the author of, and cannot be charged with, the sin that occurs.

Wait, what? God is, but isn't.

No, looks like I'm not as Reformed as I previously thought. I guess I'm something else. I view it more cut and dry. God is or He isn't. He did all or He didn't.

From Dort:Human beings were originally created in the image of God and were furnished in mind with a true and sound knowledge of the Creator and things spiritual, in will and heart with righteousness, and in all emotions with purity; indeed, the whole human being was holy. However, rebelling against God at the devil’s instigation and by their own free will, they deprived themselves of these outstanding gifts.

Yep, not what I believe. Guess I'm not Reformed if the Reformed Church bases their beliefs on this... which I find odd, because it seems to contradict predestination and the lack of free will.

(11-12-2013 10:08 AM)djkamilo Wrote: Not quite a good Calvinist IMHO as a former Reformed Xtian, the Reformed confessions make it clear that depravity was not God's design, but man was made 'good' and man by choice and nature became depraved. (Belgic Confession [Articles 13-14], Canons of Dort [Third Main Point of Doctrine, Article 1-2]) Your explanation actually makes your concept of God the caricature of the monster Arminians and us Atheists have come to despise.

I reject that notion. Something can't not be in God's design. That makes God short sighted and not omniscient.

Likewise, having a "choice" isn't being true to Reformed and Calvinistic theology. I'm aware of the synergistic belief that humans have a share in the regeneration process, but that's just another form of Arminianism. This is just people wanting to try and justify some type of choice in the theology. It's simply not possible if God is omnipotent. I'm also aware of the notion that God elects someone because He knew that person was going to choose Him. That's also another form of Arminianism because it's placing the choice on the human, regardless if God knows. God is still making the choice based on the human's future decision which subjugates God to humanity; destroying His omnipotence.

I've never claimed that God doesn't appear as a monster in some place. If you read the Bible and don't see this, then you're blind. I'll just refer you back to what I said about our morality, God's plan, and His autonomy.

So, you say that god could be a monster at times, right? You see all the destruction and death he causes all throughout the world. (since he planned everything, diseases that kill more than any war ever could) Ever since the dawn of the human era everyone who died who never even heard of Jesus Christ since he only came to earth about 2 thousand years ago go straight to hell. How much elect are there anyway? Does the big guy give out vouchers every few years or is it limited, if so how many?

(11-12-2013 10:24 AM)RobbyPants Wrote: That's a very specific verse about a very specific incident to use as a justification that the age of accountability (which is never explicitly mentioned in the Bible) is 20.

Sure, I'm open to other views, and this one passage wasn't intended as an exhaustive review of the doctrine. Personally I don't think it would be a specific age, but rather mental capability, which is typically but not always reached at a certain age. I use "age of accountability" as it's a traditional term for the concept.

Quote:I think you're overstating your position that the majority of people are either explicitly or implicitly Christian.

My position is that the majority of people are saved, based on an age of accountability doctrine. That doctrine doesn't require them to be Christians. You're misstating my position.

Estimates of total miscarriage rate from conception are as high as 70%. If life begins at conception and the age of accountability doctrine is accurate, yes, a majority of people are saved, despite the position that a majority of those who make it to adulthood are condemned.

(11-12-2013 10:50 AM)kingschosen Wrote: I read through the confessionals, and to me, they seem contradictory, thus I have to reject them.

This right here in inexcusable and is a slap in the face to basic logic:

We believe that this good God, after creating all things, did not abandon them to chance or fortune but leads and governs them according to his holy will, in such a way that nothing happens in this world without God’s orderly arrangement. Yet God is not the author of, and cannot be charged with, the sin that occurs.

Wait, what? God is, but isn't.

No, looks like I'm not as Reformed as I previously thought. I guess I'm something else. I view it more cut and dry. God is or He isn't. He did all or He didn't.

From Dort:Human beings were originally created in the image of God and were furnished in mind with a true and sound knowledge of the Creator and things spiritual, in will and heart with righteousness, and in all emotions with purity; indeed, the whole human being was holy. However, rebelling against God at the devil’s instigation and by their own free will, they deprived themselves of these outstanding gifts.

Yep, not what I believe. Guess I'm not Reformed if the Reformed Church bases their beliefs on this... which I find odd, because it seems to contradict predestination and the lack of free will.

As I said earlier. The term choice is misleading, hence there seems to be contradiction when in fact there may not be depending upon whether the word "choice" is being used in a subjective or objective way.. Consequently we see the phrase "free will" being used in conjunction with a description depicting the innocent and gullible being manipulated by a more knowledgeable and cunning Satan.

(11-12-2013 10:50 AM)kingschosen Wrote: From Dort:Human beings were originally created in the image of God and were furnished in mind with a true and sound knowledge of the Creator and things spiritual, in will and heart with righteousness, and in all emotions with purity; indeed, the whole human being was holy. However, rebelling against God at the devil’s instigation and by their own free will, they deprived themselves of these outstanding gifts.

Yep, not what I believe. Guess I'm not Reformed if the Reformed Church bases their beliefs on this... which I find odd, because it seems to contradict predestination and the lack of free will.

That would put you in the hyper-calvinist camp I'm afraid which is just a purely-deterministic version of Reformed theology. You are right that the confessions contradict themselves but they do this because of theological reasons, not logical ones. It's way too common for people to believe that determinism is Reformed christianity it isnt. The confessions sort that out.

As far as your cop out, to say that God does atrocious things that are somehow acceptable in his scope of things, you are assuming God to be a moral entity, notice how he resembles the morality of the writers that describe him.

I wonder what keeps you as a Theist? You seem to be a logical person.

“The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is because vampires are allergic to bullshit.” ― Richard Pryor

(11-12-2013 10:56 AM)alpha male Wrote: My position is that the majority of people are saved, based on an age of accountability doctrine. That doctrine doesn't require them to be Christians. You're misstating my position.

Estimates of total miscarriage rate from conception are as high as 70%. If life begins at conception and the age of accountability doctrine is accurate, yes, a majority of people are saved, despite the position that a majority of those who make it to adulthood are condemned.

Good point. If you're counting all of the ensouled fetuses, then yes, the vast majority of people would go to heaven.

Also, I don't want to derail this thread, but I have a related question for you here.

(11-12-2013 11:41 AM)djkamilo Wrote: As far as your cop out, to say that God does atrocious things that are somehow acceptable in his scope of things, you are assuming God to be a moral entity, notice how he resembles the morality of the writers that describe him.

Nope. I actually said the opposite. Your assumptions about my assumptions are way off base. I don't believe God is capable of morality as we see morality.

There is only God's plan. That plan trumps all.

Unfortunately, to us... that plan has to have some immoral (in our view of morality) stuff.

Since God is autonomous, it's just His plan. He isn't subjected to morality. The only morality that He is subjected to is His own... and since it's His own, it's not necessarily a morality. Morality has to have a governing standard to base itself against.